(25-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: Near brought up the fact that in California guns are heavily restricted and it's a rarity to for people to freely have them.

Here in Louisiana, we have very little gun restrictions, so my view on them has been molded as such.

Near also said that gun violence was partly because of the lack of education; however, I have to disagree. Not many people don't know what happens when you fire a gun at somebody. I believe that it's the person that's the problem... their mental state. I'm sure they know that a bullet will kill someone, but maybe they don't mentally grasp the consequences of death... of what that bullet really does.

Good post KC.

About guns here in California, they are heavily restricted, things such as magazine capacity are quite restricted,. You have to have a locking magazine; in that you have to have a 'key' of sorts to release the magazine (not sure if this applies to handguns or not). I'm sure there are many, many others, but since I have never owned or fired a real gun, I don't really care about the regulations or know about them.

A short digression to clarify my personal stance on guns. As I said, I have never owned nor operated a gun. I have nothing against guns, or gun ownership I just don't think that it is for me.

I am for more controls being in place. More thorough background checks, and perhaps we should start including psych evaluations. I think there should be mandatory safety classes put on by a non-biased third party (Not from the government, not from angry pro-gun people either. Just a dry presentation of what a firearm is and what its operations are. How to clean a gun, proper gun safety etc. No propaganda should be given for either pro or anti gun groups) The safety classes should be something like car registration, you do it every x amount of time, and it costs you a fee.

Now, a big problem that I have with California's gun laws is this: I went to a gun show with some friends, not really my thing, but I wanted to hang out so I went along. As I stated before, magazine capacity in California is restricted to I believe 10 rounds, although it may be 5 for larger weapons. It is illegal to own magazines with a greater capacity than that. At the gun show, a big part of what was being sold was high capacity magazines that were partially disassembled. Such that you can assemble the magazine in under 10 seconds. The way they are able to get away with this is that they have a label on all of these magazines that says something like: "This magazine is sold for parts only and is not to be assembled. It is a felony to assemble this magazine."

Clearly, people do not buy these for just parts. They buy them because they have no regard for the law, (all of the gun owners that I know feel that the laws are 'stupid' or unjust. For the record, I know one atheist gun owner, all the rest are quite religious.) if they feel that the law is stupid, they aren't going to follow it. It's just a word game that the people play, kind of an inside joke. "You would clearly never assemble this and commit a felony, so we'll sell you this for 'parts' ."

There are also parts that are sold, to specifically counteract the requirement for having a locking magazine. You put this little piece in the 'key hole' and it then basically acts as a push button release for the magazine.

These are just the two things that I am aware of, there are probably more.

Now, I am against those laws. I think that they sound good in theory, but they won't reduce gun deaths. Those that want to do serious damage can easily get the parts to do so. If the citizens were respecting the law, they would have no recourse against criminals with superior firepower. I suppose it's somewhat of a good thing that the people can't be bothered to follow the law.

Finally, I may have misspoke about what I think is a contributor to gun violence. There are of course cases where a child gets their hands on a gun, that was not properly stored, and they accidentally shoot themselves, or a friend. This sort of thing is I think, due to lack of education (plus stupidity on the gun owner who kept a loaded gun stored in easy reach of a child).

There is a lot of gun violence in the US that has nothing to do with education. Those would be gang violence, domestic violence, crimes of passion etc. When it comes to mass shooting, that is also not due to lack of education, but pretty much always due to mental instabilities.

TL;DR VERSION:

Yes, guns are quite restricted in California. Californians disregard the laws and purchase illegal parts. I think we need more gun regulations, not on the types of guns you can have, but what you have to do to get a gun legally. I have nothing against guns myself, they just aren't for me. Gun violence is partially due to lack of education, but more to do with people with mental problems, gang violence, domestic violence, and crimes of passion.

The People's Republic of Maryland is about to introduce some of the most restrictive gun legislation in the Nation. How will this affect Girly? Not a goddam bit. I keep Mossberg's at the ready for as the Bugsmasher puts it, "things that go bump in the night". (And to shoot pumpkins and watermelons a couple times a year just for the fun of it.) Don't own handguns 'cause it'd just be too easy to off myself in a temporary fugue and too much of a burden to keep them locked up so there ain't no accidents. Don't own "assault rifles" 'cause they just ain't much fun for shooting pumpkins and watermelons. Do have a nice .177 Beeman for target shooting and varmint control and shit, but it's just an expensive BB gun and nobody's worried about them. So some of the most restrictive gun regulations in the Nation have zero impact on Girly's ability to protect himself and his family and control the rat population. Think the NRA's blind opposition to any and all restrictions on gun control whatsoever is just fucking ignorant and makes them look fucking retarded.

I work with a guy who needed a 155mm howitzer to do some ballistics research. Army had one ready to give him but dude couldn't figure out how to get our organization to accept delivery so he finally just said fuck it and told them to deliver it to his home address. The shit storm that ensued was hilarious, but in the end he got the howitzer he needed to do his research.

I wasn’t part of the Skype session, but I was interested to see a thread on the cultural, rather than the political/legal, aspects of guns in the U.S. So let me add the perspective of someone who’s just about as far to one end of the gun spectrum as it’s possible to be.

Guns are foreign objects to me. I have literally never touched a gun in my life, much less shot one. No one in my family had or has a gun (as far as I know). I grew up in New York City and now live in Los Angeles, in relatively safe neighborhoods. Not one person among my friends or neighbors (again, as far as I know) had or has a gun. I didn’t have toy guns when I was a kid—never played Cowboys and Indians. I wasn’t in the military. And I don’t play video games.

For me, guns are ugly, even loathsome, objects. Unlike knives, the sole purpose of a gun is to kill. I see nothing attractive in that. The idea of collecting guns leaves me scratching my head. I would no sooner collect guns than I would collect guillotines or electric chairs.

Nor do I get the hunting thing. I’m not taking a moral position against killing animals; I’m a big meat-eater. It’s the “fun” aspect I don’t get. Some people obviously get a big kick out of going out into the woods and killing quail and ducks and deer and whatever else is legal to shoot. I will never be able to understand why anyone in their right mind finds that enjoyable.

All of that being said, I realize that those are my personal feelings, based partly on my experience and upbringing and partly on my emotional make-up, and that I don’t have the right to impose my beliefs on anyone else.

But I’m not the only one who feels this way. The gun-positive and gun-negative factions in the U.S. are so polarized, it’s as if we come from different planets, where we can’t even begin to communicate with each other. Par for the course in 21st-century America, of course—abortion, gay marriage, religion, taxation, role of government . . . it’s like two different, hostile countries super-imposed on each other. Compromise won’t be easy.

Just one more thing on the cultural aspect of guns that I don’t see discussed very often: the idea of guns as a rite of passage to manhood and a doorway to masculinity.

Take a look at this Huff Post article published shortly after the Sandy Hook massacre:

It shows an ad by Bushmaster for a semi-automatic rifle, part of a two-year campaign they apparently discontinued after the massacre, with the tag line “CONSIDER YOUR MAN CARD REISSUED.” You can find out more about the campaign in the article. The point is that such guns are being marketed as ways of proving you’re a man. (Corvettes as penile extensions are a lot more expensive, I guess.) Skinny, outsider teens who have been bullied and ridiculed by their peers are seduced into believing that owning a big gun will make them into the men they want to be—because, after all, real men are physical and violent and shoot things up. I haven’t seen psychological studies of the Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown assassins, but I’d be surprised if these young men weren’t influenced by the “guns make you a man” culture prevalent in the U.S.

From the Huff Post article:

Quote: In a press release for his 2008 book on the subject of hypermasculinity and violence, UCLA professor of education Douglas Kellner said: "The school shooters and domestic terrorists examined in this book all exhibit male rage, attempt to resolve a crisis of masculinity through violent behavior, demonstrate a fetish for guns or weapons, and represent, in general, a situation of guys and guns amok."

(25-01-2013 03:07 PM)cufflink Wrote: But I’m not the only one who feels this way. The gun-positive and gun-negative factions in the U.S. are so polarized, it’s as if we come from different planets, where we can’t even begin to communicate with each other. Par for the course in 21st-century America, of course—abortion, gay marriage, religion, taxation, role of government . . . it’s like two different, hostile countries super-imposed on each other. Compromise won’t be easy.

Yes. But one of them is dying out and just going through some particularly nasty death throes, the other one hasn't even finished stretching before the big race yet. Compromise will not be necessary soon enough.

(25-01-2013 03:07 PM)cufflink Wrote: I wasn’t part of the Skype session, but I was interested to see a thread on the cultural, rather than the political/legal, aspects of guns in the U.S. So let me add the perspective of someone who’s just about as far to one end of the gun spectrum as it’s possible to be.

Guns are foreign objects to me. I have literally never touched a gun in my life, much less shot one. No one in my family had or has a gun (as far as I know). I grew up in New York City and now live in Los Angeles, in relatively safe neighborhoods. Not one person among my friends or neighbors (again, as far as I know) had or has a gun. I didn’t have toy guns when I was a kid—never played Cowboys and Indians. I wasn’t in the military. And I don’t play video games.

For me, guns are ugly, even loathsome, objects. Unlike knives, the sole purpose of a gun is to kill. I see nothing attractive in that. The idea of collecting guns leaves me scratching my head. I would no sooner collect guns than I would collect guillotines or electric chairs.

Nor do I get the hunting thing. I’m not taking a moral position against killing animals; I’m a big meat-eater. It’s the “fun” aspect I don’t get. Some people obviously get a big kick out of going out into the woods and killing quail and ducks and deer and whatever else is legal to shoot. I will never be able to understand why anyone in their right mind finds that enjoyable.

All of that being said, I realize that those are my personal feelings, based partly on my experience and upbringing and partly on my emotional make-up, and that I don’t have the right to impose my beliefs on anyone else.

But I’m not the only one who feels this way. The gun-positive and gun-negative factions in the U.S. are so polarized, it’s as if we come from different planets, where we can’t even begin to communicate with each other. Par for the course in 21st-century America, of course—abortion, gay marriage, religion, taxation, role of government . . . it’s like two different, hostile countries super-imposed on each other. Compromise won’t be easy.

Just one more thing on the cultural aspect of guns that I don’t see discussed very often: the idea of guns as a rite of passage to manhood and a doorway to masculinity.

Take a look at this Huff Post article published shortly after the Sandy Hook massacre:

It shows an ad by Bushmaster for a semi-automatic rifle, part of a two-year campaign they apparently discontinued after the massacre, with the tag line “CONSIDER YOUR MAN CARD REISSUED.” You can find out more about the campaign in the article. The point is that such guns are being marketed as ways of proving you’re a man. (Corvettes as penile extensions are a lot more expensive, I guess.) Skinny, outsider teens who have been bullied and ridiculed by their peers are seduced into believing that owning a big gun will make them into the men they want to be—because, after all, real men are physical and violent and shoot things up. I haven’t seen psychological studies of the Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown assassins, but I’d be surprised if these young men weren’t influenced by the “guns make you a man” culture prevalent in the U.S.

From the Huff Post article:

Quote: In a press release for his 2008 book on the subject of hypermasculinity and violence, UCLA professor of education Douglas Kellner said: "The school shooters and domestic terrorists examined in this book all exhibit male rage, attempt to resolve a crisis of masculinity through violent behavior, demonstrate a fetish for guns or weapons, and represent, in general, a situation of guys and guns amok."

Food for thought.

There was a study done years ago by one of my college professors (this was done in the early 80s and I had him in 1986)...it showed that outside a kid's own home, male children were much more likely to 'play' with a gun -- despite being told by their parents not to.

The study (from what I recall) was very small. Less than a hundred kids and parents. The parents had guns in their home and said they stressed gun safety to their children. The gun the kids found was in a desk drawer in a box. So, the kids had to look for it. No one told the kids not to touch the desk or that there was a gun in the room was located in a family home. The kids were between 7-10 years old and didn't require constant supervision. I can't remember how long it took for kids to find the gun. But I do recall him saying, the longer the kids were left alone with it after it was discovered the more likely the play escalated. (I do recall seeing a video tape of one boy hiding it with his jacket when an adult came into the room to deliver snacks).

The parents reaction was the most interesting. The study was more about the parents than the kids and what they considered to be gun safety and what organizations like the NRA told parents...

But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

I've had some weird combo of the first three posts. I, like TheBeardedDude grew up in Tennessee, and I moved back here a year ago after 5 years here and there. Granted, those years away I was still regularly exposed to firearms as part of my job but outside of work I still understood that not everyone was comfortable with guns. Hell, even some of the folks at work were not ever required to use weapons. I also had a classmate who was killed by his cousin which was another classmate of mine in an accident where weapons were left lying about. I own a few firearms myself, and plan on buying more as time goes on, but I do understand they can freak people out. While trying to keep this thread apolitical I will say that I support the freedom to own and bear arms in public and in private, but some regulation is in order. I do understand the concerns people have, guns are deadly weapons which can be used to kill many people. Despite my negative experiences I also know the odds of a maniac going on a killing spree and harming me and my family are pretty damn low, and I'm willing to accept those risks in order to continue the freedom that I enjoy as do millions of others. I also know that whatever law is passed it would be a virtual impossibility to remove even 90% of the guns in circulation in America, there are simply way too many of them it would be more harmful than helpful to try. You cannot unring a bell. What I can teach people who are not familiar with guns though is that the media tends to exaggerate and use scare tactics by focusing on and exploiting only the most terrible stories, and ignoring the positive side. They also use false-hoods by using vague language, and scary sounding terms to boost their ratings. This should not be surprising information, but too often people are surprised when they learn what a "sniper rifle" and "assault rifle" are. That's my take...

Anyhow, I would urge anyone living with children to keep your guns in a safe place. I would also recommend that they keep the chamber empty and the magazine in a separate location that is still easily accessible to the adults, but not accessible to children. In addition you should educate your children and stress the importance of how deadly it is. If everyone did this there would be no accidental deaths. If I have children my guns will not be lying around.

P.S. Guns do not just "go off". It just does not happen. This is the biggest undue worry I hear from people not familiar with them. This is what people say who have a negligent discharge but do not like to own up to the fact that they weren't practicing proper gun safety. If there is nothing touching the trigger I can guarantee you that an gun will not just "go off". Unless it has been modified you could throw a handgun down a flight of stairs over and over until the thing falls apart and it still will not "just go off".

(26-01-2013 01:33 AM)Dark Light Wrote: If there is nothing touching the trigger I can guarantee you that an gun will not just "go off". Unless it has been modified you could throw a handgun down a flight of stairs over and over until the thing falls apart and it still will not "just go off".

(25-01-2013 03:07 PM)cufflink Wrote: I wasn’t part of the Skype session, but I was interested to see a thread on the cultural, rather than the political/legal, aspects of guns in the U.S. So let me add the perspective of someone who’s just about as far to one end of the gun spectrum as it’s possible to be.

Guns are foreign objects to me. I have literally never touched a gun in my life, much less shot one. No one in my family had or has a gun (as far as I know). I grew up in New York City and now live in Los Angeles, in relatively safe neighborhoods. Not one person among my friends or neighbors (again, as far as I know) had or has a gun. I didn’t have toy guns when I was a kid—never played Cowboys and Indians. I wasn’t in the military. And I don’t play video games.

For me, guns are ugly, even loathsome, objects. Unlike knives, the sole purpose of a gun is to kill. I see nothing attractive in that. The idea of collecting guns leaves me scratching my head. I would no sooner collect guns than I would collect guillotines or electric chairs.

Nor do I get the hunting thing. I’m not taking a moral position against killing animals; I’m a big meat-eater. It’s the “fun” aspect I don’t get. Some people obviously get a big kick out of going out into the woods and killing quail and ducks and deer and whatever else is legal to shoot. I will never be able to understand why anyone in their right mind finds that enjoyable.

All of that being said, I realize that those are my personal feelings, based partly on my experience and upbringing and partly on my emotional make-up, and that I don’t have the right to impose my beliefs on anyone else.

But I’m not the only one who feels this way. The gun-positive and gun-negative factions in the U.S. are so polarized, it’s as if we come from different planets, where we can’t even begin to communicate with each other. Par for the course in 21st-century America, of course—abortion, gay marriage, religion, taxation, role of government . . . it’s like two different, hostile countries super-imposed on each other. Compromise won’t be easy.

Just one more thing on the cultural aspect of guns that I don’t see discussed very often: the idea of guns as a rite of passage to manhood and a doorway to masculinity.

Take a look at this Huff Post article published shortly after the Sandy Hook massacre:

It shows an ad by Bushmaster for a semi-automatic rifle, part of a two-year campaign they apparently discontinued after the massacre, with the tag line “CONSIDER YOUR MAN CARD REISSUED.” You can find out more about the campaign in the article. The point is that such guns are being marketed as ways of proving you’re a man. (Corvettes as penile extensions are a lot more expensive, I guess.) Skinny, outsider teens who have been bullied and ridiculed by their peers are seduced into believing that owning a big gun will make them into the men they want to be—because, after all, real men are physical and violent and shoot things up. I haven’t seen psychological studies of the Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown assassins, but I’d be surprised if these young men weren’t influenced by the “guns make you a man” culture prevalent in the U.S.

From the Huff Post article:

Quote: In a press release for his 2008 book on the subject of hypermasculinity and violence, UCLA professor of education Douglas Kellner said: "The school shooters and domestic terrorists examined in this book all exhibit male rage, attempt to resolve a crisis of masculinity through violent behavior, demonstrate a fetish for guns or weapons, and represent, in general, a situation of guys and guns amok."

Food for thought.

Good post. The problem here is you have a lot of similar people who know absolutely nothing about guns and then are deciding public policy on firearms based on fear tactics.

if you don't like guns, fine. Do not buy one. But don't pursue laws that affect me and my hobbies because of it.

I'd suggest at least going down to a shooting range once and firing a few guns with the aid of a qualified firearms instructor before you decide what should be outlawed in terms of personal weaponry.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

(26-01-2013 02:05 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote: I'd suggest at least going down to a shooting range once and firing a few guns with the aid of a qualified firearms instructor before you decide what should be outlawed in terms of personal weaponry.

Blowing big ass melons to bits with a shotgun provides a never-ending source of amusement for me.

(26-01-2013 02:05 PM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote: if you don't like guns, fine. Do not buy one. But don't pursue laws that affect me and my hobbies because of it.

I got no problem with Bugsmasher and all the other gun enthusiasts running around here owning whatever firepower they want somewhere south of a howitzer. But those here are responsible. Tell me how we can more effectively keep them out of the hands of the irresponsible without violating other basic human rights. ... The answer has to come from the gun enthusiast community, 'cause no other source will be credible.

(25-01-2013 03:07 PM)cufflink Wrote: It shows an ad by Bushmaster for a semi-automatic rifle, part of a two-year campaign they apparently discontinued after the massacre, with the tag line “CONSIDER YOUR MAN CARD REISSUED.” You can find out more about the campaign in the article. The point is that such guns are being marketed as ways of proving you’re a man....

If you find that Bushmaster advertising sentiment offensive, then you are not alone - I find it absolutely revolting. Even though I really like Bushmaster Rifles - they are well built and can reliably deliver a lot of firepower - I do take exception with their advertising. I mean, the creeps involved with Bushmaster's marketing campaigns aren't doing the cause for owning guns any favors - and I've written the bastards at Bushmaster several times explaining that sentiment.

I remember one ad Bushmaster had on their website where they glorified men in Black Suits and Black Face Masks using their guns to....goodness knows what. I swear, the ads graphics were just what I would imagine someone using if they were running a recruiting campaign for the "New-and-Improved Waffen SS". I guess these ads were to appeal to certain cretinous members of Law Enforcement and the Military - or any other NAZI wanna-be. I gave Bushmaster a ration of shit over these ads. They pulled them for awhile.

The gun manufacturers, the NRA and the Gun Culture in general in this country continue to be their own worst enemies. By there volatile rhetoric - which issues like explosive diarrhea - they end up alienating a lot of people that could otherwise be reasoned by spewing crap over everything.